Playing for a purpose: A systematic review and framework for gamified sustainability interventions in urban built environments

Gamification and serious games are increasingly used to address sustainability challenges in the urban built environment. These innovative solutions offer interactive, experiential approaches to knowledge transfer, behaviour change and stakeholder engagement. However, research on their application remains fragmented and lacks strategic direction. There is no up-to-date, holistic insight into existing gamified interventions, the topics they explore, or their effectiveness. Given the growing interest in this field, the absence of a structured understanding leads to misaligned research and ineffective problem targeting. Furthermore, the intended purposes behind gamified approaches are not well documented. Few theoretical frameworks exist to classify expected outcomes, limiting the development of comparable, thematically interoperable gamified interventions even within a single domain. To address this, the present study conducted a systematic literature review of 133 studies, mapping thematic gaps and overrepresented areas within gamified applications in urban sustainability and circularity (excluding mobility and transportation). The analysis identified matured research areas such as energy efficiency and urban planning, while critical themes such as natural hazards remain underexplored. Following the review, the novel Three Purposes for Gamified Interventions (3P) Framework is presented, which categorises gamified interventions into three distinct purposes: Pedagogy (educational awareness), Persuasion (behavioural change), and Participation (stakeholder co-creation). By aligning themes and purposes, while being anchored in learning, behavioural, and participation frameworks, 3P provides a structured approach for purpose-driven gamified interventions. Findings reveal a thematic inclination towards certain purposes: for example, energy efficiency and circular economy gamified interventions were predominantly persuasive, while urban development ones were mostly participatory.